Forgot your password?

typodupeerror

+ - Can you 3D print a custom designed airborne drone "relatively" cheaply?

Submitted by wisebabo
wisebabo writes "By now many of you may have seen the video of the drones (custom made?) air delivering sushi at a London restaurant. I was most impressed by the load carrying capacity (it looks like 4 "mini" rice burgers) and would love to see the control interface (it looks like it's using an iPad) as well as know what are the maintenance requirements (do they automatically land and dock/recharge themselves?).

http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/06/11/drone-delivers-flying-sushi-burgers-at-london-restaurant/

Anyway, I'm thinking that with easy to use control software there are lots of cool marginally useful tasks a drone could do (walk your very small dog, feed the goldfish, water some cactus or bonsai trees, chase crows and yes bring you beer). Since the requirements for these jobs are likely to vary considerably (while the basic airframe may be roughly the same I can imagine all sorts of camera attachments, grippers, cargo holders), it would be great if one could design and make one of these things largely (not including motors and electronics) at home. Are hobbyist 3D printers (less than $3K) up to the task? Is the plastic material strong enough for the kinds of modest* loads one could expect? Would it take a lot of work to make critical surfaces (fan blades) aerodynamically smooth or just a little sand paper? If, I mean WHEN, they crash and break, would the cost of reprinting parts be reasonable?

I heard that a company has come out with a 3D printer that makes much more accurate prints using the laser-on-liquid method of stereolithography (and is currently being sued for patent infringement!). I also heard that someone is making "an operating system" for drones that might reduce the difficulty of writing software for these things. (I've heard it'll be expensive, hope he'll license it more cheaply for non-commercial uses). I assume that current drones could be controlled by something like the arduino computer, is it light enough? Are the electric motors and batteries pretty standard? If true and these things come to pass, could I conceivably make my own drone at home?

Of course, until there's a thriving community of people passing designs around, it'll probably be best to take an existing drone (like the Parrot AR) and first build replacement parts (what's the best way to make high precision small scale 3D scans?) and then modify it. With even this basic capability there would be many things people could try, like would it be better to have bigger but slower turning blades? More blades? Fewer? How about being able to transition to a winged flying mode for greater range? What about landing gear, recharging hookups? More sophisticated users could try modeling the aerodynamics and basic structure of the drone to improve performance, handling, payload capacity. How about making a version of the "flying bird drone" that Speed Racer had with his Mach 5?

Anyway, I have one last reason why I'd like to be able to print out (most of) a drone at home. I live in Vietnam and getting anything unusual/rare/special like spare parts for a drone takes a lot of time/money/bribery. I figure it might be better to get one good 3D printer into the country than waiting weeks every time I needed to get a spare/modified part. (I'll stockpile the feedstocks).

So what's possible now (or in the next year) and what items have I left out? GPS, cellphone module, cameras, lights, antennas, microphones/speakers for sonar? Grappling hooks? Tasers? Mace? Does anyone know the bandwidth requirements for remotely controlling/watching a video feed? (the phone network here is only 3G). How about a high bandwidth laser comm link? How about powering it via microwaves or lasers?

(Of course there are even more problematic applications that can be addressed with printing a drone at home especially if it can carry a grenade or carry a 3D printed gun!) but I won't go there now. On a side note, are drones legal to be used in paintball? Can one team use drones for surveillance or dropping/firing paint bombs/weapons? Could another team fight back using drones in aerial dogfights? Since they are so fragile and expensive for the average gamer I imagine a laser target scheme could be used where it would register a hit. You could have your own mini-arms race!)

*If the plastic is really strong, I'd love to think about making an underwater drone for exploring some of the reefs in S.E. Asia!"

Comment: If they find the "switches" in humans, we're SCREW (Score 1) 102

by wisebabo (#43897951) Attached to: Genetic Switches Behind 'Love' Identified In Prairie Voles

(In more ways than one!)

Imagine being able to determine (or having someone determine for you!) who you fall in love with. A real life "love potion" as it were.

It would be the end of civilization as we know it. If it were used "rationally" we could end up as a society of Vulcans, with love (and mating) at carefully proscribed times and settings (it was called "Pon Far" or something like that). If it were used as a means of control, it could usher in a true "Brave New World". If it were used like the Internet is used today, society could fragment into hyper-specialized castes; nerds might only mate with nerds, jocks with jocks or even more specialized like accountants only wanting to be with other accountants. The human race could speciate (is that a word?) very quickly.

I've always wondered if the answer to the Fermi paradox was something like this; that we will do ourselves in not by crudely blowing ourselves up but rather in the process of understanding more and more of our biology we'd find (and open) Pandora's box. Like we'd discover an incredibly addictive drug or maybe mind control. Considering how central "love" has been to the course of human events, the ability to switch it on (or off?) could prove equally devastating.

In the book "Godel, Escher, Bach" my faint recollection is that the author claimed any programmable machine can be fed a program that can make it "halt". One example given was that of a simple record player; when a specially crafted record was played the precisely made vibrations was such that the turntable shook itself apart (halted). Maybe all intelligent creatures carry this same flaw and as our science and technology we are coming closer and closer to finding it.

Or maybe I just need to stop worrying, get some of this love potion and get myself a girlfriend! :)

Comment: So, how much do you trust the Russian govt. with y (Score 4, Insightful) 56

by wisebabo (#43709781) Attached to: Kaspersky Inks a Deal With Qualcomm To Improve Android Security

While I'm sure that Mr. Kaspersky is a trustworthy, ethical person and that his staff adhere to the highest of professional standards, the fact remains that Kaspersky is based in Russia and therefore most of its assets (and employees!) are subject to the whims of the Russian government.

And yes, I do mean "whims". I'm sure that close observers of Russia will agree that the rule of law does not apply when strategic interests (defined as whatever interests Putin) are at stake. While the United States by comparison, is hardly an angel in that regard it cannot be compared to a government that throws Billionaires in prison on trumped up charges and assassinates its own agents overseas (with Polonium no less) who cross it. Ethics and professional standards would/should crumble when your life or the lives or your family members are at stake.

So should Kaspersky be allowed to make changes (at the chip level!) I would hope that at the very least it can be shown that it does not give the Russian govt. a back door into the platform. (For the same reason I would be very reluctant to use a home grown Chinese OS on a smartphone.)

Comment: Any Oculus Rift developers in the house? (Score 2) 88

by wisebabo (#43533835) Attached to: Play <em>Tetris</em> To Fix Your Lazy Eye

Seeing as this was only a university study (and not a company project), I'm afraid that they'll publish a few papers, get their citations then move on to other things with only a prototype developed and no plans to sell it (sorry but I'm not a do-it-yourselfer and probably wouldn't want to try putting one together by myself even if the plans/source code were freely available).

So, maybe, could an Oculus Rift developer come up with this or an equivalent program? Even if the rights to Tetris are unavailable, I'm sure a similar game could be devised that would provide the same functionality (less the annoying soundtrack! ;)

Or does the Oculus Rift API only take in a high level 3D scene description and independently render the two, slightly dissimilar viewpoints? I assume not but, if so, perhaps they could be prevailed upon to add some new APIs.

It would be nice to be able to see in 3D. I might actually be able to play some ball sports (ping pong, tennis, football) with some proficiency.

Comment: Remember it's a REUSABLE SPACE TUG (Score 5, Interesting) 53

by wisebabo (#43445729) Attached to: Solar Electric Spacecraft Propulsion Could Get NASA To an Asteroid

Ok, so once the asteroid collector has delivered the asteroid to high lunar orbit, what does the spacecraft do then?

Well, if its got even a tiny fraction of its propellant left over (remember it just towed something maybe 100x its size clear across the inner solar system) , it slowly spirals down to low earth orbit and... REFUELS.
Now here's where things get interesting. Once it's refueled (remember that while its main consumable is up to 12,000 lbs. of Xenon, it gets its energy from solar power), it can do any number of things. Of course it could be sent out again to get another asteroid, including, as I mentioned in a previous post, one with precious WATER (Fuel and Oxygen!), but that might be boring. How about having it PAY FOR ITSELF by moving satellites from LEO to geosynchronous orbit. (This is very expensive as it typically requires an additional booster, I think the cost per pound is at least double that to low orbit). I think this market is on the order of $5B per year.

The reason why this would work is because the asteroid tug would clearly be capable of moving very(!) large payloads. It wouldn't even have to be very slow, if it can accelerate a 500 ton asteroid at 1/10,000th of a g, it could accelerate a 5 ton satellite at say 1/200th of a gee (taking into account the tug's own weight). So it could deliver the satellites in weeks if not days. Of course there would need to be a few minor design modifications to the tug. The collapsible "bag" would have to be removable and some sort of industry standard docking ports added. There would need to be some provision for refueling ports and critical components (gyroscopes, reaction wheels, electronics) would need to be replaceable/upgradeable like the Hubble space telescope. Of course servicing this "space tug" in this way is probably beyond the near term capabilities of robotics. However, rather than this being a problem, it could be an opportunity... ... for the International Space Station to actually be USEFUL. Here it could serve as a fuel depot, servicing "garage" and interchange point for these "space tugs". The kind of problem that robotics can't handle yet are ideally suited for an astronaut with a wrench (and maybe some elbow grease). The fact that the main propellant for these tugs is Xenon, an inert noble element, makes handling the fuel much less problematic (no problems with corrosion or toxicity) and safer (no fear of explosive combustion). Even the fact that these tugs use ion thrusters would be an advantage meaning that everything would be happening very slowly, if one went out of control they could probably move the entire station out of the way (like they do when avoiding space junk). The station could also keep spare, interchangeable parts for these tugs such as additional "bags" or robot arms or other modules. In short, the ISS would have a PURPOSE. (Although a pressurized "dry dock" would be preferable, substantial maintenance could be performed in a vacuum as the Hubble telescope servicing missions, Skylab repairs and recently tested refueling robot at the ISS).

With even a little thought, these space tugs have lots of additional uses. The same high power ion engines that can move a 500 ton asteroid could also send 500 tons of cargo cheaply (if slowly) to Mars. The same collapsible bag that can capture a tumbling asteroid can easily capture a much lighter piece of space junk. All it takes is for a government with foresight to make the initial investment that may (as I've suggested) quickly repay itself perhaps many times over. And isn't that the purpose of government (if not NASA)?

(By the way, putting the mini-asteroid in high lunar orbit may be useful as a last resort because, if we detect a threatening object heading our way, it might be in a good position that we could put the mini-asteroid on a new trajectory to hit the object and thus deflect it out of the way. With luck the 500 ton mass will strike the incoming object at a high incidental angle and at a significant velocity since it'll be coming from a completely different orbit. Of course it would be much preferred to nudge the incoming object years before in deep space off of an intercept trajectory but if we're caught with our pants down it would be nice to have a big rock whirling in the sling of its lunar orbit. In that case, we coud call it "David's Rock" or "The Goliath Killer".)

Comment: Remember it's a REUSABLE SPACE TUG (Score 1) 106

by wisebabo (#43318039) Attached to: NASA Asteroid Capture Mission To Be Proposed In 2014 Budget

Ok, so once the asteroid collector has delivered the asteroid to high lunar orbit, what does the spacecraft do then?

Well, if its got even a tiny fraction of its propellant left over (remember it just towed something maybe 100x its size clear across the inner solar system) , it slowly spirals down to low earth orbit and... REFUELS.

Now here's where things get interesting. Once it's refueled (remember its main consumable is up to 12,000 lbs. of Xenon, it gets its energy from solar power), it can do any number of things. Of course it could be sent out again to get another asteroid (including, as I mentioned in a previous post, one with precious WATER) but that might be boring. How about having it PAY FOR ITSELF by moving satellites from LEO to geosynchronous orbit. (This is very expensive as it typically requires an additional booster, I think the cost per pound is at least double that to low orbit). I think this market is on the order of $5B per year.

The reason why this would work is because the asteroid tug would clearly be capable of moving very(!) large payloads. It wouldn't even have to be very slow, if it can accelerate a 500 ton asteroid at 1/10,000th of a g, it could accelerate a 5 ton satellite at say 1/200th of a gee (taking into account the tug's own weight). So it could deliver the satellites in weeks if not days. Of course there would need to be a few minor design modifications to the tug. The collapsible "bag" would have to be removable and some sort of industry standard docking ports added. There would need to be some provision for refueling ports and critical components (gyroscopes, reaction wheels, electronics) would need to be replaceable/upgradeable like the Hubble space telescope. Of course servicing this "space tug" in this way is probably beyond the near term capabilities of robotics. However, rather than this being a problem, it could be an opportunity -

- for the International Space Station to actually be USEFUL. Here it could serve as a fuel depot, servicing "garage" and interchange point for these "space tugs". The kind of problem that robotics can't handle yet are ideally suited for an astronaut with a wrench (and maybe some elbow grease). The fact that the main propellant for these tugs is Xenon, an inert noble element, makes handling the fuel much less problematic (no problems with corrosion or toxicity) and safer (no fear of explosive combustion). Even the fact that these tugs use ion thrusters would be an advantage meaning that everything would be happening very slowly, if one went out of control they could probably move the entire station out of the way (like they do when avoiding space junk). The station could also keep spare, interchangeable parts for these tugs such as additional "bags" or robot arms or other modules. In short, the ISS would have a PURPOSE.

With even a little thought, these space tugs have lots of additional uses. The same high power ion engines that can move a 500 ton asteroid could also send 500 tons of cargo cheaply (if slowly) to Mars. The same collapsible bag that can capture a tumbling asteroid can easily capture a much lighter piece of space junk. All it takes is for a government with foresight to make the initial investment that may (as I've suggested) quickly repay itself perhaps many times over. And isn't that the purpose of government (if not NASA)?

(By the way, putting the mini-asteroid in high lunar orbit may be useful as a last resort because, if we detect a threatening object heading our way, it might be in a good position that we could put the mini-asteroid on a new trajectory to hit the object and thus deflect it out of the way. With luck the 500 ton mass will strike the incoming object at a high incidental angle and at a significant velocity since it'll be coming from a completely different orbit. Of course it would be much preferred to nudge the incoming object years before in deep space off of an intercept trajectory but if we're caught with our pants down it would be nice to have a big rock whirling in the sling of its lunar orbit. In that case, we coud call it "David's Rock" or "The Goliath Killer".)

Comment: He should get the Thresher (Score 1) 119

by wisebabo (#43231339) Attached to: Bezos Expeditions Recovers Pieces of Apollo 11 Rockets

Then he can REALLY be a super villain. (The Thresher, I believe, was armed with some nuclear weapons when it sank).

Conversely he coud also try for the nuclear sub the Glomar Challenger (Howard Hughes) tried to raise. I believe they only got the crew compartment, the missiles and (nuclear tipped?)* torpedoes are still there.

Anyone know of any other nukes sitting on the sea floor in international water just waiting to be picked up? (Did they get all four of the H-bombs from the B-52 near Spain?). Of course they are probably damaged, highly corroded. Another possibility would be the RTGs from the Apollo 13 lunar module which went down in a trench in the pacific, even though the Pu is the wrong isotope for a nuke, it would be useful for a dirty bomb.

Hope Al-Qaeda doesn't get a deep sea submersible!

*actually I don't know if there is such a thing as a nuclear tipped submarine launched torpedo. It seems that it would all too likely destroy the submarine that launched it!

Comment: They achieved cellular resolution! (Score 5, Interesting) 56

by wisebabo (#43220693) Attached to: Activity of Whole Fish Brains Mapped Second To Second

Not apparent from the (cool) video they linked to is that according to the paper in Nature (yes I RTFA and I followed a link) they say they achieved cellular resolution (the video must be a down-sampled version). This would explain them collecting 1TB of data for each 1 hour "run". Another neat thing to notice is that their data is 3D, they are collecting volumetric data (as you can see from the video "slice") and explained in a previous paper. Impressive! Now if only they could increase the temporal resolution (multiple parallel scanning beams?) we could really see how a fish thinks!

They say they could collect data from (currently small) sections of mammalian brains but it would require surgery. I wonder how soon until we see monkeys with their skulls replaced with transparent plastic or glass? Maybe they could use (a very advanced version of this) on patients undergoing brain surgery.

By the way, are there any transparent plastics that are suitable for 3D printing? Biocompatible? I can see a time when some really crazy performance artist replaces his/her skull with a transparent one. I guess they would have to wear a hat whenever they went out into the sun though.

Comment: Just a thought: THAT's what the X-37 is for! (Score 3, Interesting) 266

After thinking over my previous (long) post a little, it occurred to me that the X-37 was probably designed with NK in mind.

For those of you not familiar with it, it is a extremely flexible winged spacecraft (looks like a mini-shuttle) operated by the Air Force. By extremely flexible I mean it can be launched into any orbit (including polar ones), has demonstrated orbital maneuvering capability, (very) long life in space, and considerable cross-range capability. And it can return objects from space with its cargo bay! It's too small to retrieve large commercial satellites (but not too small to retrieve a warhead) and can gently land on a runway with rubber tires not skids. It is not man-rated and does not have a docking port or any other features that would make it useful as a rescue vehicle.

It was rumored that it was sent up to spy on the Chinese space station but for a variety of reasons, not least of which was that the Chinese would see it coming and would be pissed, that was dismissed.

So when Mr. Kim starts launching more reliable "satellites" (the first one failed after achieving orbit), I imagine the U.S. will send up one of these with a good camera and radiation detectors to give it a close inspection. Maybe it'll even come into physical contact and probe it with robotic arms! If it really looks suspicious, perhaps it will stow it on board and retun it, presumably to Guantanamo bay (that way if there's a nuke on board it won't go off on U.S. soil). (Perhaps that's why it's a WINGED re-entry vehicle, in addition to giving it cross range capability, I'd imagine the g-forces would be less not to mention no annoying "thump" when it splashes down or lands).

Unlike China, it is highly unlikely that NK has developed space based radar that could detect something sneaking up on its "Satellite" from ANY direction. (Also, here's a question, does anyone know if the X-37 is stealthed?). In addition, even if the NK satellite did detect the X-37, it couldn't easily communicate that fact to the ground; I'd bet NK has only the most rudimentary communications and tracking support, probably limited to only when it's passing over NK. I'd even doubt their few "friends" in the world (China? Iran?) would be willing to help, especially if the North Koreans were using it as a cover for putting nukes in orbit! (That's not something you want to be associated with). So it's basically blind and dumb for most of its orbit, a sitting duck for the X-37.

If the next time NK puts a working satellite in orbit the U.S. follows with a launch of the X-37 remember: you read it here first!

Comment: Is that 50 percent per interceptor? (Score 4, Interesting) 266

Or the system as a whole?

If the success rate is per interceptor, meaning that they have several chances to hit a warhead by using several interceptors then 50 percent isn't too bad. Fifty percent success (or failure) means that shooting say five interceptors at each warhead will result in a 95 percent chance of shooting it down, not perfect but certainly enough to make Kim Jung-Un realize he probably isn't going to inflict ANY damage with a suicidal nuclear attack. NK probably wouldn't be able to get off more than a few before the launch sites and command bunkers were nuked (can you say close to shore submarine based missiles on depressed trajectories?).

Of course if the success rate is for the system as a whole (doubtful) for example due to some basic limitation of the targeting radars, then adding more interceptors isn't going to deter Mr. Kim. He probably realizes that his attack is a long shot (ha ha) anyway and having 50 percent odds on taking out, say San Francisco is pretty good. So let's hope that the system is capable of targeting multiple interceptors at a single warhead so the odds are in our favor.

The best scenario is for to add more layers to make a multilayer defense. In addition to the Patriot missile batteries in South Korea and the Aegis missile cruisers offshore (can either of their missiles overtake an ascending ICBM launched hundreds of miles away?) whatever happened to the laser equipped 747s?

Now if Kim Jung-Un really wanted to make the U.S. worried, he should use his much more powerful (but extremely vulnerable and time consuming to launch) liquid fueled rockets to put a disguised nuke INTO ORBIT. Not only would it completely bypass the ABM defenses that are only protecting the U.S. from direct trajectories but it would reduce the warning time from 30 minutes to maybe 5 (or zero if an EMP blast was the goal). The only thing the U.S. could do would be to pre-emptively knock down EVERY satellite put up by NK which while easily doable, would really raise tensions. Of course NK would be violating the 1967 treaty banning weapons (especially nukes!) in Outer Space which is probably the only thing that kept us from accidental thermonuclear war but NK doesn't seem to pay to much attention to treaties.

So if NK starts orbiting largish satellites and testing re-entry vehicles, be afraid.

One side effect of all this is that the improvements in ABM systems is forcing China to upgrade its ICBM force. Unlike the Russians, the Chinese only had a few hundred (?) ICBMs capable of reaching the U.S. and no subs or bombers. They worried that if the shit REALLY hit the fan, the U.S. could launch a first strike taking out most of their missiles (not to mention iPhone production). The few surviving missiles would not make it through even the modest shield that is being built and thus the U.S. woud survive unscathed. So the Chinese are following the Russian model of bolstering their ICBM forces so that even after a first strike they would be able to overwhelm the limited ABM defenses in place.

This fear of an enhanced ABM system is one reason why China is (trying to) keep Mr. Kim from building ICBMs. Not to mention the fear that South Korea and Japan and possibly Taiwan(!!!) will decide they need a nuclear deterrent against North Korea. That would really complicate China's desire to become THE power in Asia (and make reunification with Taiwan much more perilous).

Comment: Maybe a Venus flyby is easier (Score 4, Interesting) 233

by wisebabo (#43031663) Attached to: Dennis Tito's 2018 Mars Mission To Be Manned

Have they done a similar study for a Venus flyby? The launch dates might be more forgiving, the target a bit closer, the trip length might be a shorter and the delta-V requirements a bit less. Most important maybe the earth re-entry requirements would be a little less extreme. It is a 14km/sec aero-capture maneuver prior to re-entry that would, in some scenarios, put the vehicle in an elliptical, battery power only, 10-day trajectory beyond the moon (not to mention abusing the heat shield TWICE) just to reduce G-forces!. And there's only a 6km entry "window" between burn-up and bouncing off the atmosphere on an escape trajectory!

I mean since this trip is mainly a (very useful) test of long duration deep space flight with very limited "observation" of an already well-studied planet (there are currently three orbiters and two rovers on Mars), does it really matter which planet we flyby? Since the trajectory for this mission already takes it inward almost to Venus' orbit, they will be exposed to the same levels of solar heat (and radiation). Mars is, of course, more relevant for future long term exploration but other than the P.R. value there is not much more that would be gained over going to it versus Venus.

On the other hand, if somebody forks up the money for this tomorrow, please ignore everything I said. Mars or bust!

Comment: Remember, it's a REUSABLE SPACE TUG (Score 3, Interesting) 171

by wisebabo (#42486697) Attached to: NASA Considers Putting an Asteroid Into Orbit Around the Moon

Ok, so once the asteroid collector has delivered the asteroid to high lunar orbit, what does the spacecraft do then?

Well, if its got even a tiny fraction of its propellant left over (remember it just towed something maybe 100x its size clear across the solar system) , it slowly spirals down to low earth orbit and... REFUELS.

Now here's where things get interesting. Once it's refueled (remember its main consumable is up to 12,000 lbs. of Xenon, it gets its energy from solar power), it can do any number of things. Of course it could be sent out again to get another asteroid (including, as I mentioned in a previous post, one with precious WATER) but that might be boring. How about having it PAY FOR ITSELF by moving satellites from LEO to geosynchronous orbit. (This is very expensive as it typically requires an additional booster, I think the cost per pound is at least double that to low orbit). I think this market is on the order of $5B per year.

The reason why this would work is because the asteroid tug would clearly be capable of moving very(!) large payloads. It wouldn't even have to be very slow, if it can accelerate a 500 ton asteroid at 1/10,000th of a g, it could accelerate a 5 ton satellite at say 1/200th of a gee (taking into account the tug's own weight). So it could deliver the satellites in weeks if not days. Of course there would need to be a few minor design modifications to the tug. The collapsible "bag" would have to be removable and some sort of industry standard docking ports added. There would need to be some provision for refueling ports and critical components (gyroscopes, reaction wheels, electronics) would need to be replaceable/upgradeable like the Hubble space telescope. Of course servicing this "space tug" in this way is probably beyond the near term capabilities of robotics. Rather than this being a problem, it could be an opportunity -

- for the International Space Station to actually be USEFUL. Here it could serve as a fuel depot, servicing "garage" and interchange point for these "space tugs". The kind of problem that robotics can't handle yet are ideally suited for an astronaut with a wrench (and maybe some elbow grease). The fact that the main propellant for these tugs is Xenon, an inert noble element, makes handling the fuel much less problematic (no problems with corrosion or toxicity) and safer (no fear of explosive combustion). Even the fact that these tugs use ion thrusters would be an advantage meaning that everything would be happening very slowly, if one went out of control they could probably move the entire station out of the way (like they do when avoiding space junk). The station could also keep spare, interchangeable parts for these tugs such as additional "bags" or robot arms or other modules. In short, the ISS would have a PURPOSE.

With even a little thought, these space tugs have lots of additional uses. The same high power ion engines that can move a 500 ton asteroid could also send 500 tons of cargo cheaply (if slowly) to Mars. The same collapsible bag that can capture a tumbling asteroid can easily capture a much lighter piece of space junk. All it takes is for a government with foresight to make the initial investment that may (as I've suggested) quickly repay itself perhaps many times over. And isn't that the purpose of government (if not NASA)?

Comment: Last ditch planetary defense AND Fuel! (Score 1) 171

by wisebabo (#42485279) Attached to: NASA Considers Putting an Asteroid Into Orbit Around the Moon

In addition to all the other excellent reasons why this is such a good idea (yes I RTFA) there is one (or two) more.

It would provide a last(?) ditch means of protecting ourselves against a much bigger, real threat.

If we don't detect a big asteroid now on a collision course with earth, with at least 10 years of lead time then unless we're willing to use nukes which 1) may or not work depending on the composition of the asteroid 2) may make the problem worse by breaking it up, we're out of luck. Unless we have, conveniently, this nice big 500 ton rock which we can use to hit and redirect the incoming asteroid. Depending on many many variables like how far away it hits the incoming asteroid, the sizes of the two relative velocities, orbits and whatnot it could quite an effect. (Remember that it would be coming from its high lunar orbit so could hit the incoming asteroid with a relatively high transverse velocity).

It might be even be more effective a nuke because a nuke's energy, in the vacuum of space, might be all light and radiation with little propulsive effect (which is why Bruce Willis and gang had to actually land and bury theirs on the asteroid.). It would be like the difference between getting hit by a thrown firecracker or, a rock. Both might have roughly the same "energy" but one would have it in the form of an explosive bang and the other in kinetic (motion) energy.

Of course, this would in no means supplant a real planetary defense program like Spaceguard. But Spaceguard was never going to find 100% of all the asteroids so, like I said, this could be a last ditch defense. Anyway, it's just another possible use for having our own pet rock! :)

One more thought is that, if they decide to send this asteroid collector a bit further (okay much farther) out to the "snow line" where icy comets and asteroids that haven't had all their water evaporated are, they can bring back one that's loaded with FUEL and AIR. An icy 500 ton asteroid in lunar space would be just about the most valuable resource possible, it's got WATER which can be drunk, used for radiation shielding, and when electrolyzed, the oxygen can be breathed and the hydrogen used for fuel. (Also the hydrogen can be stretched even further by combining it with the carbon from a carbonaceous asteroid to make methane rocket fuel.).

Probably the existing spacecraft design doesn't have to be changed that much, the collection "bag" if silvered should keep the asteroid frozen on the long trip back to earth. (It'll also need bigger solar panels or a nuke and more xenon fuel). And the trip would be long, probably out beyond mars to where Ceres is. That's where the DAWN spacecraft is headed, to orbit the giant possibly icy asteroid. If we're really lucky, it'll find some small 7m icy mini-moons ripe for the picking.

Honestly though the distances are too far and our detection capabilities (it's hard enough finding 7m asteroids passing near earth let alone in the asteroid belt) too modest to make this a realistic goal for our first effort in asteroid collecting. Maybe version 2.0.

Comment: GET THAT IDIOT TO ISSUE A TAKEDOWN NOTICE! (Score 1) 622

by wisebabo (#41343389) Attached to: YouTube Refuses To Remove Anti-Islamic Film Clip

Get some federal Marshalls to walk up to that idiot's house in California, knock (or kick down the door). Have them tell that idiot that Obama is asking him to get on the phone to Google and issue a takedown notice. (Evidently he's been cowering in fear and is regretting his actions). It's his copyrighted property no?

This may/will not stop the rioting but will remove one problem. And it will show those idiots in the middle east that the U.S. is doing everything (legally) permissible to protect their "sacred" religion.

Patents

+ - Samsung, the "great imitator" (and that's in a GOOD way)->

Submitted by wisebabo
wisebabo writes "Here's an article that looks at the Samsung-Apple battle from a Korean point of view. Yes, Samsung may be an "imitator" but it's a GREAT one. As a commentor notes, look what happened to those companies (Nokia, Motorola, RIM) that didn't imitate the iPhone, they got crushed. That wouldn't be acceptable for the "national champion" that Samsung is. At least Samsung survived, thrived and now is set to dominate the smartphone market with the Galaxy IV release after the iPhone 5.

Anyway, if so, be careful for what you wish for. A world where the winners are not innovators but rather "fast executioners"; this may lead us to technological stasis. Imagine if Samsung were able to copy DOS, we'd still be typing on C: prompts! (Admittedly the systems would be very cheap and fast).

An interesting note is just like the article mentions, my Korean friends cannot believe there would be an impartial jury (what with the trial occurring in Apple's hometown and the alleged technical incompetence of the jurors). On the other hand, my American friends find it surprising that the Korean judges presiding over Korean case might be biased (despite Samsung contributing a FIFTH of the entire economy and the CEO and underlings being convicted and imprisoned on bribery and corruption charges).

I guess people see in others what they see in themselves."

Link to Original Source

Given its constituency, the only thing I expect to be "open" about [the Open Software Foundation] is its mouth. -- John Gilmore

Working...